Why are teabagger types attracted by the idea of living 40 miles from work?

[Nichlemn]

The more interesting general question is "why do different types of settlement vote as they do?" Unfortunately, like many partisan questions it inevitably spirals down to hackery. According to Republicans, exurbs vote Republican because they're full of affluent people who want good schools and safe communities for their kids. According to Democrats, exurbs vote Republican because they're full of insular, bland whites who want to keep their kids away from minorities. There's probably truth to both statements, except both sides will always play up the story that satiates their preconceived world view.

[Nichlemn]

Why does anyone live anywhere except the best possible place for them? Because it's cheaper. If no-one wanted to live in exurbs, prices on exurban property would decrease until some would.

[Nichlemn]

Why does anyone live anywhere except the best possible place for them? Because it's cheaper. If no-one wanted to live in exurbs, prices on exurban property would decrease until some would.

But then why don't more liberal middle class people move there? For example take Richfield and Fridley. Both are bland middle class suburbs very close to the city. Both tend to be pretty Democratic. Yet they have similar incomes and demographics to most of Michele Bachmann's district. There's really only one difference: The houses in them are much smaller.

What could possibly motivate people to have bigger houses? How could that factor possibly affect voting patterns?

[Nichlemn]

Why does anyone live anywhere except the best possible place for them? Because it's cheaper. If no-one wanted to live in exurbs, prices on exurban property would decrease until some would.

But then why don't more liberal middle class people move there? For example take Richfield and Fridley. Both are bland middle class suburbs very close to the city. Both tend to be pretty Democratic. Yet they have similar incomes and demographics to most of Michele Bachmann's district. There's really only one difference: The houses in them are much smaller.

What could possibly motivate people to have bigger houses? How could that factor possibly affect voting patterns?

The type of mentality I discussed here:

My theory is that it involves a desire to own a big house and the whole "ALL PRODUCTIVE AMERICANS OWN HOUSES, IT'S THE AMERICAN DREAM BLAH BLAH BLAH" nonsense. They can't afford to own a big house in the city or even an inner suburb, so they move far away to where there's lots of land and real estate is cheap so they can buy their hideous McMansion at the price of a house half the size in the city. Meanwhile people who are wealthier but don't care about owning houses and rent a nice condo in the city are obviously more liberal.

Might they have simply have more children?

[Nichlemn]

Then why are they so strongly against public schools and things like SCHIP?

Because they might feel that the corresponding tax reductions or alternative policy (like school vouchers) and perceived superiority of private schools would make them and their children better off.